|
Hi guys,
I've been working on my own video series (inspired by Filter) to help players get promoted.
You can find the delightfully relaxed monotone series here: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzmPoyyu5nvCLhiOHQekbJms6015jrjtN
I highly value your feedback and look forward to hearing your comments on my work so far.
I'd also like to discuss the learning approach I take here before receiving a bunch of flak for it. I have a feeling a lot of people are going to beat their chests and scream macro and mechanics at the top of their forum lungs and berate me for misleading the delicate minds of newbies with allins. Don't get me wrong, I do quite heartily agree that mechanics are the fundamental skills required to develop playing SC2. I disagree with a very common interpretation of that, however.
I don't believe macro to necessarily include multiple bases and a city of production facilities: macro is all about hotkeys, they allow you to issue commands fast enough to gain more money and spend more money. If you are practicing using these hotkeys to build structures, units, and workers, I don't think it matters just how many of these Command Centers or production facilities are attached to the key, the result of the practice is the same. You could argue that having more bases and thus increased income creates stress to use these hotkeys faster or more efficiently leading to more skill at macro, and while true, I believe the same stress is created managing your army in a way that makes using a single base viable on ladder. For that reason, I believe the one base approach to work just as well.
There is a substantial benefit to working with a single base versus multiple bases. From a very early stage, the player is forced to be more careful with controlling his units (micro) and being precise with his/her build. This exposes said player to the full depth of the game right off the bat, and allows him to develop these skills from the very beginning. As s/he gets more proficient, adding a Command Center and/or removing an SCV pull is trivial because the player as a deeper understanding of build orders. The only thing left to learn for them is how much production to add and having that production added to the appropriate hotkeys - a very simple thing to do. For that potent reason, I believe a one base approach to be even better.
This is a style of improvement and learning I'm sharing in the hopes others think the same way I do and are able to use this approach to succeed.
|
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
|
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
Yes you do, in the builds I describe all the workers are not pulled (just the oversaturated ones)
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
In the builds I'm using, with the exception of the bronze build (I cut out the depots to make it easier), you need to make depots until the end of the game in most situations
-Don't learn to add on production
You're right, but there is more attention paid to managing the production facilities you do have (not over queuing), and this is something easily picked up later
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
Not always true, you could be attacked earlier than your timing or be counter attacked while executing a build - and besides, this is really just multitasking, and you are exercising that skill by denying and attacking expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
That's extremely game specific, not a general skill - but you do get a lot of practice trading units and in so doing develop your skill at estimating cost and reward
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
You need to continually produce workers/units/supply while being aggressive and is the same skill whether you have 1 base or 4, the only difference is more depots when you move your screen back to base - very minor
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
The goal is to improve, and achieving Masters is the proof of that improvement. While you will get a warm fuzzy feeling, it's because you've improved. I'm not saying one base is the end all be all of SC2, I'm saying it's a great place to start and learn the game all the way to the higher levels. After you're there, as I detailed in the original post, learning the rest is quite easy because you have all the skills necessary to learn them quickly. After all, a Command Center is just another part of a build an a small addition to the same hotkey you've been using since bronze. The skills you learn approaching the game this way is a far cry from a paper tiger - it's a concrete foundation ready to support the full weight, complexity, and depth of SC2.
|
On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
I understand where you are coming from, but some people learn or pick up things differently then others do. If the true goal is to improve your game, winning, losing, or even rank shouldn't matter at all.
|
I pretty much agree with Tenks, furthermore, I wouldnt expect to go masters with a 5-6 rax all rines all in...
at some point ppl will start scouting your build. then you should start dying fairly often.
|
Austria24416 Posts
On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
Most importantly imo, you'll never learn to evaluate what you can afford / when you can afford it / how to use it properly and how to transition against what your opponent does. Basically you'll never win a standard game but you're also gonna start losing tons of games because the higher you get, the more players will (easily) dispatch of 1 base shenanigans. I doubt you'll ever learn how to deal with infestors for example if you only play 1 base. You'll probably never even see one and if you do, you've probably already lost.
1 base openings are good, yes. And they can be important to mix in if you play a tournament. But this is ladder ffs, you'll never even be good enough to play in a tournament if all you do is 1 base all in.
You're learning to micro, yeah. But you're only learning to micro vs what your opponent can have at the time your all in hits, which is pretty stupid as it completely ignores learning to control vs units that hit later. You'll be able to outmicro zealot/stalker maybe. Cool! Will you be able to handle blink stalkers/chargelots? Different story. If you're gonna do all ins, at least do 2 base all ins where your army somewhat resembles a composition that's useful throughout the game.
|
Your videos involve you facing the newest of the bronze, i would like to see the strat you do against somebody decent! GOGO advanced video or something ;/
|
Northern Ireland461 Posts
Interesting, I feel Filters' method is akin to classically training a new SC2 player, this is different, and different isn't necessarily a bad thing. I am curious to others opinions on using cheese as a valuable teaching method, I ask because recently my housemate has taken a liking to SC2 and has just bought the game, I was wondering if Filters method would be ideal, or is it better to learn 1 base builds first, as they do have their merit. I would bank you would see faster overall improvement from 1 base builds, however it would only be improvement up to a certain point. Would any higher level players have an opinion on this?
|
Austria24416 Posts
On January 24 2013 00:49 mau5mat wrote:
Interesting, I feel Filters' method is akin to classically training a new SC2 player, this is different, and different isn't necessarily a bad thing. I am curious to others opinions on using cheese as a valuable teaching method, I ask because recently my housemate has taken a liking to SC2 and has just bought the game, I was wondering if Filters method would be ideal, or is it better to learn 1 base builds first, as they do have their merit. I would bank you would see faster overall improvement from 1 base builds, however it would only be improvement up to a certain point. Would any higher level players have an opinion on this?
Well it's definitely not the worst thing to start with. You shouldn't be doing builds that require more infrastructure than you can manage properly. But masters is too high I think. You should be able to handle a one base economy by the time you reach gold. If you're in silver or bronze, sure. You'll learn basic micro. The thing is though, your opponents are obviously bronze or silver too so they won't micro too well. I think you gain more by learning standard builds because you'll be able to profit on more fronts.
If you play protoss though, I feel like 2 base all ins are a GREAT tool to learn protoss micro as you'll be using units that protoss has to use perfectly at a high level to survive (zealots, sentries, stalkers, maybe immortals).
|
On January 24 2013 00:49 mau5mat wrote:
Interesting, I feel Filters' method is akin to classically training a new SC2 player, this is different, and different isn't necessarily a bad thing. I am curious to others opinions on using cheese as a valuable teaching method, I ask because recently my housemate has taken a liking to SC2 and has just bought the game, I was wondering if Filters method would be ideal, or is it better to learn 1 base builds first, as they do have their merit. I would bank you would see faster overall improvement from 1 base builds, however it would only be improvement up to a certain point. Would any higher level players have an opinion on this?
This guide is more short term with a cutoff where you would have to branch out and learn how to 2base ect. Filter's guide goes straight to the endgame which has no cutoff, but is long and takes time to learn. It really is up to you and your housemate though, would he prefer to have a simple goal that teaches a few aspects of SC2 or a more complex goal that teaches most aspects at once?
|
On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
I did a very similar method to OP. I played Terran until masters then switched to protoss. Once you get to masters, it's much easier to study/practice because you have developed the core mechanics of playing a small number of short builds flawlessly and can expand from there. To give you an idea of how successful this method can be, I'm comfortably top 25 gm for the duration of this season. It's definitely not just for that little masters icon imo.
gogo OP gj gl hf
|
Northern Ireland461 Posts
On January 24 2013 01:16 Eifer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper. I did a very similar method to OP. I played Terran until masters then switched to protoss. Once you get to masters, it's much easier to study/practice because you have developed the core mechanics of playing a small number of short builds flawlessly and can expand from there. To give you an idea of how successful this method can be, I'm comfortably top 25 gm for the duration of this season. It's definitely not just for that little masters icon imo. gogo OP gj gl hf
^ thanks to all the replies above. @Eifer; Could you elaborate on what you used to get to Masters buildwise as Terran?
|
On January 24 2013 01:25 mau5mat wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2013 01:16 Eifer wrote:On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper. I did a very similar method to OP. I played Terran until masters then switched to protoss. Once you get to masters, it's much easier to study/practice because you have developed the core mechanics of playing a small number of short builds flawlessly and can expand from there. To give you an idea of how successful this method can be, I'm comfortably top 25 gm for the duration of this season. It's definitely not just for that little masters icon imo. gogo OP gj gl hf ^ thanks to all the replies above. @Eifer; Could you elaborate on what you used to get to Masters buildwise as Terran?
I would probably use both of these, one day practice one method the next practice the other. Once you have hit all the required targets regularly move up to next level.
|
Thank you for making this, it's refreshing to see someone share/teach a method that doesn't focus on making a bunch of stuff. Of course, those methods can work well too, but working on 1 base plays also allows you to focus on specific things and improve them quickly while still being able to go very far. I think it's more fun too, focusing on things like micro, unit counters, when to attack, etc., rather than when to expand and how many production facilities to build.
|
To be a really good player you must not play macro all the time, or else you'll get too predictable. Learning some one base builds is always a good method to improve. Getting a good mix of all-ins and macro builds is the right choice to make. Especially, in the basic learning phase you will get a mix of both skills, macro and micro.
I think that this is another good way for learning, which finally doesn't emphasize on macro only.
|
On January 23 2013 23:38 Tenks wrote:
You say there are advantages but there are also a ton of disadvantages:
-Don't learn to make workers throughout the game
-Don't learn to constantly make supply depots
-Don't learn to add on production
-Don't learn to expand and defense expansions
-Don't learn to know when to sacrifice an expansion
-Don't learn to prioritize adding said depots/production/expansions over obsessing over microing a battle
Sure if your only goal is to get that little Masters icon next to your name to get some warm fuzzy feeling then 1base is the way to go. If you want to also know you are looked down upon by the majority of the community and your skills are nothing but a paper tiger then go the approach of learning the game proper.
Let's say someone wants to learn a new playstyle. This is one of the best ways to go about it. When you start something new from the ground up, you can learn it from a beginners viewpoint all over again. That may not be the goal here, but it is a potential implementation for this theory.
|
Its superficial masters league to get it by one-basing. Back when I was P i got to masters by 1basing and 2basing all of my opponents. Yes, I had the icon, but I didn't have the mechanics to compete with even skilled opponents past the early/midgame. I went back (when i switched to T) and learned all stages of the game. Now I can say I am legit masters because i can keep up with my opponents at all stages of the game (in fact I prefer the midgame and lategame because it allows me to outplay my opponents better then I could with cheesy aggressive builds that lose when scouted.
That said, it's important to mix in some aggression now and then to prevent you from being too predictable.
|
I one based to rank 1 diamond.
And now I can macro like a motherfucker.
Riddle me that, haters.
|
I dont like the plat build against terran, it's seems to late. Because most terrans will have 100 supply at the 10 minute mark, and will know ur on 1base with tanks. They will catch ur tanks unsieged, when he's medivacs are out, it's game over for this build. I dont see how this late push can win games against a 2-base T, but, im only silver so who cares
I did like the micro tutorial bout stutterstepping and splitting and the strats to gold. There arent many easy tutorials bout that on utube
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On January 24 2013 03:06 HoLe wrote:
I one based to rank 1 diamond.
And now I can macro like a motherfucker.
Riddle me that, haters.
Rank 1 diamond isn't considered high level at all on TL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
